Abstract
Background Waste landfill sites are associated with gaseous emissions and this air pollution can cause unpleasant smells (“malodour”). This causes concerns about its impact on the health of the local population. This study assessed change in general practice consultation behaviour during a period of increased complaints associated with air pollution at a UK landfill site.
Methods The study period was October 2020 to December 2021. The age-sex standardised prevalence and incidence of consultations for mental health, respiratory, and other symptoms hypothesised to be impacted by the air pollution issues were determined and compared between: i) 6 practices located close to the landfill site (zone A), ii) 6 practices located a mid-distance from the site (zone B), iii) 6 practices located further away and expected to have had less impact (zone C).
Results Whilst there was an increased consultation for mental health problems in practices nearest to the landfill site compared to those furthest away, consultation frequencies for respiratory and other potentially associated symptoms were lower and likelihood of consultation was consistently highest in practices located in zone B.
Conclusion This study did not show clear evidence of an increase in recorded primary healthcare contacts for conditions and symptoms hypothesised to be connected to air pollution. It highlighted the challenges of examining the impact of air pollution on the health of local populations. Since this study focussed on coded consultations in primary care and not symptoms present in the general population, an impact on the health of individuals cannot be ruled out.
How this fits in
Air pollution from waste landfill sites may impact on the health of the local population.
We did not find consistent evidence of increased healthcare consultations to general practices which were nearest to such pollution.
This study highlights the challenges in examining the impact of air pollution on health.
Symptoms may still be increased in the general population and an impact on the health of individuals cannot be ruled out.
Competing Interest Statement
Funding for the study was obtained from Staffordshire County Council
Funding Statement
The study was funded by Staffordshire County Council. SM, CDM and KPJ are partly funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration West Midlands. CDM is also part funded by the NIHR School for Primary Care Research. CB is funded by an NIHR Clinical Lectureship. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Keele University Research Ethics Committee (REC Project Reference 0138) and the Health Research Authority (HRA) (Reference: 22/PR/0078) gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The datasets underlying this article cannot be shared publicly due to privacy of individuals as they refer to individual consultation records. However summarised data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
